Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:22:00 -0800 From: "Chris H." <chris#@1command.com> To: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's new on the 127.0.0/24 block in 7? Message-ID: <20080304032200.zydn8p7688ss00g0@webmail.1command.com> In-Reply-To: <20080304105448.GA84355@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <200803040619.m246Jbja018523@drugs.dv.isc.org> <20080304000320.msp5bfrytc0wsowg@webmail.1command.com> <20080304095246.GA77655@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20080304022321.kjxdx6oo0gkkwck8@webmail.1command.com> <20080304105448.GA84355@eos.sc1.parodius.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org>:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 02:23:21AM -0800, Chris H. wrote:
>> What I am having absolutely no understanding of; is why do
>> 2 FBSD servers sharing the same setups, and the same stock
>> lo0 setups react /completely/ differently than each other,
>> when the only difference is the version of FBSD, and the
>> version of the BIND?
>> RELENG_6 server has nothing more than the 7-RC3 regarding
>> lo0 (/etc/defaults/rc.conf: ifconfig_lo0="inet 127.0.0.1").
>> when I start rbldnsd on the RELENG_6's primary IP port:530
>> with a zone file using 127.0.0.2 && a zone file using
>> 127.0.0.3. Everything works like a charm.
>> Yet same setup, same config, different FBSD version;
>> nothing works as it did before.
>
> This is bordering on "not enough information", sadly. People are going
> to need to see the details you're holding back.
No. It's not a matter of "holding back". I really don't want to spam
the stable list with ports litter. My main concern/question was in
figuring out why 2 identical server configs would react so differently
in the way they handle lo0 and friends - rbldnsd, or no rbldnsd.
>
>
> Start with providing the output from "ifconfig lo0" on both the RELENG_6
> box and the RELENG_7 box.
I've already committed an /etc/rc.conf:
ifconfig_lo0="inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0" which is now active
on the 7-RC3 server.
So until later I can only provide the RELENG_6 output:
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000 inet6 ::1 prefixlen
128 inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
I'll uncommit/unactivate the 7-RC3 entry as soon as I can and
provide it's output, as well.
>
> Secondly, as Mark (Andrews) pointed out, whatever data you have in your
> rbldnsd **zone files** has nothing to do with the IP or IPs bound to
> lo0.
>
> What's really needed at this point is for you to describe in detail your
> rdnsbld configuration on both machines, and what it is you want to
> accomplish. As it stands right now, my understanding is that you are:
>
> * Running a single instance of rbldnsd on both machines,
> * Binding rbldnsd on each machine to publicip:530
> * Utilising zone data which contains IPs 127.0.0.2 and 127.0.0.3
Actually, I'm only running rbldnsd on one machine at a time. With
the final goal of running it permanently on the 7-RC3 (current work
in progress).
>
> And that the setup works OK for you on RELENG_6, but not RELENG_7.
Correct.
>
> I really don't want to have to install rbldnsd on both of our production
> RELENG_6 and RELENG_7 boxes to tinker with this and figure out what's
> going on, but if I have to, I will.
No. Please don't bother yourself with this. This wasn't meant to be
the topic of this thread - it's just the situation that brought me
to my question(s) regarding the behavior of lo0 and friends.
Thank you for considering it though. :)
> I can assure you that both of our
> said boxes are identical when it comes to the behaviour of loopback;
> nothing there has changed.
Fair enough. My RELENG_6 boxen must be demon possessed, or something -
D'OH! Pardon the pun. :P
>
> I didn't mean to imply you're stupid or incompetent -- that is in no way
> what I was getting at. But there does seem to be some disconnection
> going on: it's important that you understand A records or PTR records in
> zone files (which is what those 127.0.0.[23] addresses are) do not have
> direct relation to IP addresses bound to interfaces nor netmasks.
No. Just the ability to create/connect/communicate over them (the IP's).
Which it seems the RELENG_6 server is happy to provide - inspite of
how unorthodox it is.
Thank you very much for all the time you've taken.
--Chris H
>
> --
> | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com |
> | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ |
> | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA |
> | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
--
panic: kernel trap (ignored)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080304032200.zydn8p7688ss00g0>